19:02:44 #startmeeting Fedora DotNet (2017-03-07) 19:02:44 Meeting started Tue Mar 7 19:02:44 2017 UTC. The chair is Rhea. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 19:02:44 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 19:02:44 The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_dotnet_(2017-03-07)' 19:02:49 #meetingname dotnet 19:02:49 The meeting name has been set to 'dotnet' 19:03:02 #nick dotnet 19:03:08 #chair 19:03:08 Current chairs: members of to 19:03:12 #topic Agenda 19:03:20 #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Meeting:DotNet_2017-03-07 19:03:31 #info (1) Roll Call 19:03:33 #info (2) Announcements 19:03:42 #info (3) Action items and Tickets 19:03:44 #info (4) Packaging progress 19:03:47 #info (5) GSoC 19:03:58 #topic Roll Call 19:04:00 #info Name; Timezone; Sub-projects/Interest Areas 19:04:06 #action dotnet New members, make sure you introduce yourself on the DotNet mailing list [ https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/DotNet ] 19:04:14 If this is your first time at a DotNet meeting, feel free to introduce yourself to everyone and say hello! If anyone has any questions before we get started with the rest of the agenda, now is also a good time to ask. 19:04:54 .fas nmilosev 19:04:55 nmilosev: nmilosev 'Nemanja Milosevic' 19:05:13 hello! 19:05:26 hi everyone 19:05:39 Hi 19:05:48 .hello rhea 19:05:49 Rhea: rhea 'Radka Janek' 19:05:56 #info Radka Janek; UTC+1; CommOps, Diversity, DotNet,... 19:06:24 Not sure if anyone else shows up o.o 19:06:25 #info Amitosh Swain Mahapatra; UTC+5:30; DotNet, Python, Go, Docs 19:06:33 .hello nb 19:06:35 nb: nb 'Nick Bebout' 19:07:01 uaaa whitespace python! 19:07:05 * Rhea runs away from amitosh 19:07:39 .hello tmds 19:07:40 tmds: tmds 'Tom Deseyn' 19:08:17 #topic Announcements 19:08:19 #info === "Announcing .NET Core Tools 1.0" === 19:08:22 .hello bt0dotninja 19:08:23 bt0: bt0dotninja 'Alberto Rodriguez Sanchez' 19:08:26 #link https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/dotnet/2017/03/07/announcing-net-core-tools-1-0 19:08:33 #info VS2017: https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/visualstudio/2017/03/07/announcing-visual-studio-2017-general-availability-and-more 19:08:41 #info === "1.0.4 & 1.1.1 release" === 19:08:46 #link https://github.com/dotnet/core/blob/master/release-notes/1.0/1.0.4.md 19:08:50 #link https://github.com/dotnet/core/blob/master/release-notes/1.1/1.1.1.md 19:09:09 Anything else? =) 19:09:28 #link https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/nmilosev/dotnet-sig/ 19:09:36 :) 19:09:40 well that's not an announcement :D 19:09:50 f26 forked, so we are building also for f27! :D 19:09:50 And you didn't give it a title :P 19:09:58 darn 19:10:14 I have it in tickets.. 19:10:16 #undo 19:10:16 Removing item from minutes: 19:10:21 #topic Action items and Tickets 19:10:29 #link https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2017-02-28/dotnet.2017-02-28-19.02.html 19:10:32 #link https://pagure.io/fedora-dotnet/issues?tags=meeting 19:10:37 #info How This Works: We look at past #action items from the last meeting for quick follow-up. If a task is completed, we move on to the next one. If it isn't, we get an update and re-action it if needed. If no status, we'll try to get a quick update and move forward. 19:10:52 #info === [COMPLETE] nmilosev create dotnet-sig copr repository for our current and future packages. === 19:10:57 nmilosev: paste it please :D 19:11:07 #link https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/nmilosev/dotnet-sig/ 19:11:22 Also about this one... 19:11:24 #info === [INCOMPLETE] nmilosev create a ticket tracking source build for f26 (25) === 19:11:44 I suppose given the time, we can make it "for F25-27" or ... whatever, just generally source build 19:11:56 forgot that one, sorry, but no progress so far, apart from a few emails with MS 19:12:03 nothing new 19:12:06 no worries hehe 19:12:21 Just a note here: 19:12:45 For the 1.1.1 and 1.0.4, we *should* be able to build them with rover and provide an update, also new tools, correct? 19:12:54 I only need change commit id's 19:13:11 Yes, if that's what the current package was (i'm a little confused which one was which) 19:13:19 the -clean was rover, -sig is -clean ? 19:13:30 i think 19:13:33 yep 19:13:36 same SRPM even 19:13:50 I will try to build it for the next meeting, you can action it. 19:13:52 Yeah just a quick update hopefully without any issues 19:14:11 Do we even have 1.0? 19:14:14 However, we will probably need new payload from omajid 19:14:21 We don't have 1.0 now 19:14:26 #action nmilosev update packages to 1.1.1 19:14:43 #action omajid fetch new stuffs for nmilosev for 1.1.1 19:14:45 :D 19:14:49 Like that? 19:14:59 Sorry i'm in slightly crazy mood heehe:P 19:15:07 We maybe don't need it, if we can build 1.1.1 with 1.1.0 19:15:12 I will try 19:15:13 RHEL packages are blocked because of compatiblity/support concerns :( 19:15:56 #action nmilosev create a tracking ticket for future source build (F25+) 19:15:56 nmilosev: rover only builds parts of corefx and coreclr. afaik you wont get all the fixes in 1.1.1 if you use rover. 19:16:14 omajid: what about sdk? 19:16:19 that get carried over 19:16:20 ? 19:16:36 Well maybe it's time to go all source? 19:16:53 Rhea: really difficult since only F23 is doable 19:17:02 last i looked rover took everything from the original payload and replaced the native parts of corefx and coreclr. sdk gets carried over too, i think. 19:17:15 rover is more for solving bootstrapping issues, not for actual builds, i think. 19:17:17 nmilosev: i might be able to help, finally free of nonsnese called life 19:17:32 free of .. life? 19:17:47 Hmm... Yes. 19:17:55 * Rhea makes serious face. 19:18:02 :D 19:18:04 vampiress 19:18:07 :D 19:18:11 #info === [COMPLETE] Rhea issue to dotnet/core-setup - Linux Packaging === 19:18:13 #link https://github.com/dotnet/core-setup/issues/1599 19:18:24 Shall I split the package 19:18:36 Dude don't even joke about it, i bought new vibrant red makeup for blood, got a new dress, etc... going to a party as a vampire in two weeks :D 19:18:42 sdk in a separate one? 19:19:08 Well if you see my last comment... we can aim towards that, will see if anyone has some other ideas, if we can improve it... 19:19:22 In our case it would be `dotnet-devel` I suppose 19:19:30 Okay, let's wait then until a consensus is reached 19:19:41 yeah: dotnet == runtime, dotnet-devel == sdk 19:19:47 dotnet-devel requires dotnet 19:19:56 seems cool if it like that 19:19:59 +1 for dotnet-devel 19:20:18 seems consistent, most other SDKs follow this 19:20:49 (though they are C++ headers etc, etc) 19:21:09 if upstream suggests calling it dotnet-sdk, i suggest going with that over -devel. 19:21:35 +1 for following upstream 19:21:47 +1 19:21:50 * pcreech late :( 19:22:11 yeah, if everyone is calling it sdk, however -devel is more fedora-like 19:22:25 Yup omajid that's why I'm bringing that option there, that it can be swapped for -dev or -devel as per distros conventions 19:22:43 I'd like to come to some guidelines in that ticket 19:22:54 So it's more consistent between different distributions 19:23:05 * omajid understood that ticket as literally suggesting dotnet-sdk, not dotnet-devel or dotnet-dev 19:24:52 i suggest deferring the naming until that ticket is resolved, then. 19:25:03 Yup 19:25:04 that 19:25:17 omajid, yes 19:25:25 Sooo 19:25:32 #topic Packaging progress 19:25:42 Do we actually have anything here since last time? 19:25:53 I have a question 19:25:54 Source-build-wise you said you didn't have time right nmilosev 19:25:57 ASK!! 19:26:03 so sdk is 1.0.0 19:26:03 >_< 19:26:08 how do we actually get it 19:26:11 in f25 19:26:20 apart from taking it from binary ms packages 19:26:21 By... waiting for nmilosev to build it. 19:26:25 xD 19:26:28 Rhea who's that guy :D 19:26:35 I don't know! 19:26:52 Seriously though :( 19:27:01 Nah seriously tho we can look at it some time this week, ping me on telegram to be sure that i get it (not always on irc) 19:27:06 Up until now, we god our sdk from rhel build 19:27:09 got* 19:27:13 We can pick it up issue by issue 19:27:59 okay, hopefully I will have time to look into it 19:28:05 Oh, hey another thing 19:28:13 does this work 19:28:16 .fasinfo nmilosev 19:28:18 nmilosev: User: nmilosev, Name: Nemanja Milosevic, email: nmilosevnm@gmail.com, Creation: 2015-11-06, IRC Nick: nmilosev, Timezone: Europe/Belgrade, Locale: en, GPG key ID: F8E8597F4E08DC87A6EF90BCE7E2F6DBB9CB3A1D, Status: active 19:28:21 nmilosev: Approved Groups: fedorabugs packager campusambassadors ambassadors freemedia cla_done cla_fpca 19:28:29 * nmilosev is a packager now 19:28:40 :) 19:28:53 congrats! 19:29:04 Oh already? 19:29:14 Join our FAS group then, and err... 19:29:21 dotnet-packagers list 19:29:24 I went and packaged a smaller package, to see how the process is 19:29:35 thanks omajid! 19:31:11 #topic GSoC 19:31:16 uaaa 19:31:28 There are about... three or four I think students interested 19:31:37 wow! 19:31:39 I believe that it's 2/2 split for the ideas 19:31:49 + nmilosev whom I don't count as a student lol 19:31:52 :D 19:31:56 aww 19:32:54 Rhea: when are the applications starting? 19:32:56 A GSoC student is here ... 19:33:01 March 20 19:33:07 =) 19:33:12 Yup indeed, 20th 19:33:45 In the meantime as I replied to a few of them/you - I recommend getting familiar with the application process 19:34:11 #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/GSOC_2017/Student_Application_Process 19:34:30 And the usual suspects - we will be using git, you should know that, no big deal... 19:34:46 And you should know something about C# and in case of the systemd thing, be familiar with that / dbus 19:34:59 Cause that idea is a bit tougher than the asp.net one 19:35:10 Anyway, any questions about GSoC/ 19:35:13 ? 19:35:19 Is it possible to apply for more than one project? 19:35:26 (and get only one) 19:35:27 Proposal format? 19:35:31 Not sure there... jwf you still here? 19:35:39 * jwf peeks in 19:35:43 * Rhea summoning Justin 19:35:48 HI 19:35:56 There, question, if you have an answer 19:35:57 nmilosev: Got the same question 19:36:14 nmilosev: I don't think it would be an issue to put another proposal in so long as it's before March 20th. Just know that there's a chance there might not be enough student slots we receive from Google for all project ideas. 19:36:28 I would just try to expedite getting a new project idea onto the wiki before March 20. 19:36:35 It's more of a student side question 19:36:41 whether the student can apply for two 19:36:45 Oh, *apply for* 19:36:48 Hmmm. 19:37:11 So If I opt to apply for 2 different Fedora projects, is it okay? 19:37:32 I think it's possible, so long as the applicant communicates this up front to both mentors during the application process. What we don't want to do is accept the same student for two different projects. I would make this clear to both project mentors when going through the application process. 19:37:59 Just know that you can only be accepted for one project (and the application is pretty intense just for one)! 19:38:14 I would suggest it as a better aim and focus of your time to go for a single project instead of two. 19:38:27 Otherwise, you'll have to apply for both, and you have to create a timeline for both project proposals. 19:38:49 Nah, getting one is great, but I wondered if one can apply for more than one. 19:39:06 And do only one. 19:39:51 heehe 19:39:55 Google says you can apply upyo 5, but as jwf said, writing a proposal for a single project is quite a difficult task 19:39:59 Like bigger chances 19:40:13 s/upyo/upto/ 19:40:35 * amitosh shooed python away from the head 19:41:44 =] 19:41:49 Anything else guys? 19:42:17 theee end in 3 seconds 19:42:37 I have some questions about the systemd idea 19:42:52 wondering if it should be discussed here 19:44:19 Well, here or in our channel anytime, but i'm leaving after this meeting is over 19:44:29 (i'm in the office, i have to go home!) 19:45:02 #endmeeting